6 ms·
While I agree this is a technical path that makes sense, I'm not sure it's a financial path that does. Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products f
by horsawlarway 14d ago
While I agree this is a technical path that makes sense, I'm not sure it's a financial path that does. Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products for wealthy consumers or businesses.
Which doesn't mean I disagree with you. I also think that this progression is the most likely. But it implies we're decades away from broad adoption rates.
Think fifty years to hit mass adoption, not five. (Because that much more closely aligns with other structurally disruptive tech like automobiles or computers) Which is definitely not the story being pitched to investors at the moment.
- _carbyau_ 14d ago> Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products for wealthy consumers or businesses. Products that start life as "for the rich, first adopters" and work their way down the economic classes are a thing. Whether it is the thing in this case I don't know. > Which is definitely not the story being pitched to investors at the moment. I would think that what is pitched is what investors want to hear....